DElayed COloRectal cancer care during COVID-19 Pandemic (DECOR-19): Global perspective from an international survey.

BACKGROUND: The widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer care during the pandemic. METHODS: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of colorectal cancer patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in colorectal cancer care. Respondents were divided into 2 comparator groups: (1) "delay" group: colorectal cancer care affected by the pandemic and (2) "no delay" group: unaltered colorectal cancer practice. RESULTS: A total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the delay (745, 70.9%) and no delay (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units, units fully dedicated to coronavirus disease 2019 care, and personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology, and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the delay group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan, and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of colorectal cancer care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in coronavirus disease-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units were statistically associated with unaltered colorectal cancer care in the no delay group, while the geographic distribution was not. CONCLUSION: Global changes in diagnostic and therapeutic colorectal cancer practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health care delivery systems, hospital's preparedness, resource availability, and local coronavirus disease 2019 prevalence rather than geographic factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize colorectal cancer care.

The da Vinci Xi: a review of its capabilities, versatility, and potential role in robotic colorectal surgery.

The Xi is the latest da Vinci surgical system approved for use in colorectal surgery. With its novel overhead architecture, slimmer boom-mounted arms, extended instrument reach, guided targeting, and integrated auxiliary technology, the Xi manages to address several limitations of earlier models. The versatility of this new system allows it to be implemented in a wide range of colorectal procedures - from complex multiquadrant colectomies to challenging mesorectal dissections in the pelvis. While commonly criticized for its cost and prolonged operative time, robotic colorectal surgery holds the potential for enhanced ergonomics, superior precision, and a reduction in the learning curve involved in training an expert surgeon. This review appraises the existing literature on robotic colorectal surgery while elaborating how the improved capabilities of the Xi serve to usher in a new era of minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

Endowrist versus wrist: a case-controlled study comparing robotic versus hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) remains a technically challenging procedure. This study aims to compare the surgical outcomes of the robotic-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) versus hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) techniques in performing TME for patients with rectal cancers. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent RAL TME for rectal cancers was performed. These cases were matched for age, sex, and stage of malignancy with patients who underwent HAL TME. Data collected included age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, comorbid conditions, types of surgical resections and operative times, perioperative complications, length of hospital stays, and histopathologic outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: From August 2008 to August 2011, 19 patients, with a median age of 62 (range, 47 to 92) years underwent RAL TME. Eight (42.1%) patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The median docking and operative times were 10 (range, 3 to 34) and 390 (range, 289 to 771) minutes, respectively. There was 1 (5.3%) conversion to open surgery. The grade of mesorectal excision was histopathologically reported as complete in all 19 cases. Positive circumferential margin was reported in 1 (5.3%) patient.Comparing the 2 groups, more patients in the RAL group received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (8 vs. 3; P=0.048). The operative times were longer in the RAL group (390 vs. 225 min; P<0.001). A higher proportion of patients in the HAL group required conversion to open surgery (5 vs. 1; P=0.180) and developed perioperative morbidities (3 vs. 7; P=0.269). The median length of hospitalization was comparable between both groups (RAL: 7 vs. HAL: 6 d; P=0.476).The procedural cost was significantly higher in the RAL group (US$12,460 vs. US$8560; P<0.001), whereas the nonprocedural cost remained comparable between the 2 groups (RAL: US$4470 vs. HAL: US$4500; P=0.729). CONCLUSIONS: RAL TME is associated with lower conversion and morbidity rates compared with HAL TME. The longer operating times and higher procedural costs are current limitations to its widespread adoption.

Single-port endo-laparoscopic surgery in combined abdominal procedures.

Single-port endo-laparoscopic surgery has gained support in the surgical community because it is perceived to offer a better postoperative outcome as it requires only a single incision. We write this prospective observational study to ascertain the feasibility and safety of this technique in patients otherwise requiring two operations. Five patients who underwent double procedures with a single-port device were reviewed: Case 1, a transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair and gastric wedge resection; Case 2, cholecystectomy and diaphragmatic hernia repair; Case 3, oophorectomy and incisional hernia repair; Case 4, anterior resection of the rectum and hepatic segmentectomy; and Case 5, left adrenalectomy and cholecystectomy. Patient demographics, type of port used, operative time, complications and incision length were collected. Mean operative time for the cases ranged from 100 to 315 min. Incision length for the single-port device was 2 cm. In Case 2, an additional 5-mm port was used and an intraoperative complication involving a laceration of the liver occurred during the suturing of the gallbladder fundus. An additional 8-cm lower abdominal incision (Pfannenstiel) was required in Case 4 to complete the colonic anastomosis and for specimen retrieval. Single-port endo-laparoscopic surgery is a feasible and safe technique for approaching double procedures. It drastically reduces the number of scars that a double procedure creates, and if difficulty arises, another port can always be added to ease the operation. It can also potentially reduce the number of admissions and anesthesia that a patient undergoes.

Managing Deep Postanal Space Sepsis via an Intersphincteric Approach: Our Early Experience.

PURPOSE: Managing deep postanal (DPA) sepsis often involves multiple procedures over a long time. An intersphincteric approach allows adequate drainage to be performed while tackling the primary pathology at the same sitting. The aim of our study was to evaluate this novel technique in managing DPA sepsis. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent this intersphincteric technique in managing DPA sepsis from February 2008 to October 2010 was performed. All surgeries were performed by the same surgeon. RESULTS: Seventeen patients with a median age of 43 years (range, 32 to 71 years) and comprised of 94.1% (n = 16) males formed the study group. In all patients, an internal opening in the posterior midline with a tract leading to the deep postanal space was identified. This intersphincteric approach operation was adopted as the primary procedure in 12 patients (70.6%) and was successful in 11 (91.7%). In the only failure, the sepsis recurred, and a successful advancement flap procedure was eventually performed. Five other patients (29.4%) underwent this same procedure as a secondary procedure after an initial drainage operation. Only one was successful. In the remaining four patients, one had a recurrent abscess that required drainage while the other three patients had a tract between the internal opening and the intersphincteric incision. They subsequently underwent a drainage procedure with seton insertion and advancement flap procedures. CONCLUSION: Managing DPA space sepsis via an intersphincteric approach is successful in 70.6% of patients. This single-staged technique allows for effective drainage of the sepsis and removal of the primary pathology in the intersphincteric space.

Laparoscopic versus an open colectomy in an emergency setting: a case-controlled study.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopy continues to be increasingly adopted for elective colorectal resections. However, its role in an emergency setting remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between laparoscopic and open colectomies performed for emergency colorectal conditions. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent emergency laparoscopic colectomies for various surgical conditions was performed. These patients were matched for age, gender, surgical diagnosis and type of surgery with patients who underwent emergency open colectomies. RESULTS: Twenty-three emergency laparoscopic colectomies were performed from April 2006 to October 2011 for patients with lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding (6), colonic obstruction (4) and colonic perforation (13). The hand-assisted laparoscopic technique was utilized in 15 cases (65.2%). There were 4 (17.4%) conversions to the open technique. The operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (175 minutes vs. 145 minutes, P = 0.04), and the duration of hospitalization was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6 days vs. 7 days, P = 0.15). The overall postoperative morbidity rates were similar between the two groups (P = 0.93), with only 3 patients in each group requiring postoperative surgical intensive-care-unit stays or reoperations. There were no mortalities. The cost analysis did not demonstrate any significant differences in the procedural (P = 0.57) and the nonprocedural costs (P = 0.48) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Emergency laparoscopic colectomy in a carefully-selected patient group is safe. Although the operative times were longer, the postoperative outcomes were comparable to those of the open technique. The laparoscopic group did not incur a higher cost.

To LIFT or to flap? Which surgery to perform following seton insertion for high anal fistula?

BACKGROUND: The ideal surgery following seton insertion for high anal fistulas remains debatable. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the success between the endorectal advancement flap and the ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract techniques as the definitive procedure following seton placement. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at the Division of Colorectal Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore, between April 2006 and July 2011. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: After seton placement for high anal fistulas, 31 and 24 patients underwent the endorectal advancement flap and the ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract procedures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Failure was defined as the nonhealing of the surgical wounds or persistent discharge at the external opening. RESULTS: We identified 31 patients with a median age of 49 (range, 19-74) years in the endorectal advancement flap group. The median interval from the seton procedure to the flap procedure was 13 (range, 4-284) weeks. Over a median follow up of 6 (range, 2-26) months, 29 (93.5%) patients had successful outcomes. There were 24 patients, median age 41 (range, 16-75) years, in the ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract group. The median interval from the seton placement to the definitive surgery was 14 (range, 8-74) weeks. Over a median follow-up of 13 (range, 4-67) months, 15 (62.5%) patients had successful outcomes. Hence when performed as the initial definitive procedure after a seton, the endorectal advancement flap technique had a significantly higher success rate in comparison with the ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract approach (93.5% vs 62.5%) (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: In patients who have had seton placement for high anal fistulas, the endorectal advancement flap technique is associated with better short-term outcomes in comparison with the ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract technique.

An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: There is growing enthusiasm for robotic-assisted laparoscopic operations across many surgical specialities, including colorectal surgery, often not supported by robust clinical or cost-effectiveness data. A proper assessment of this new technology is required, prior to widespread recommendation or implementation. METHODS/DESIGN: The ROLARR trial is a pan-world, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, superiority trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. It will investigate differences in terms of the rate of conversion to open operation, rate of pathological involvement of circumferential resection margin, 3-year local recurrence, disease-free and overall survival rates and also operative morbidity and mortality, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The primary outcome measure is the rate of conversion to open operation. For 80% power at the 5% (two-sided) significance level, to identify a relative 50% reduction in open conversion rate (25% to 12.5%), 336 patients will be required. The target recruitment is 400 patients overall to allow loss to follow-up. Patients will be followed up at 30 days and 6 months post-operatively and then annually until 3 years after the last patient has been randomised. DISCUSSION: In many centres, robotic-assisted surgery is being implemented on the basis of theoretical advantages, which have yet to be confirmed in practice. Robotic surgery is an expensive health care provision and merits robust evaluation. The ROLARR trial is a pragmatic trial aiming to provide a comprehensive evaluation of both robotic-assisted and standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative resection of rectal cancer.

The anatomy of failures following the ligation of intersphincteric tract technique for anal fistula: a review of 93 patients over 4 years.

BACKGROUND: Although the ligation of intersphincteric tract technique is a promising sphincter-preserving option in managing anal fistulas, failures are still seen. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to illustrate the patterns of failures and recurrences following the ligation of intersphincteric tract procedure for anal fistulas. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at the Division of Colorectal Surgery, University Surgical Cluster, National University Health System, Singapore, from April 2006 to September 2010. PATIENTS: Ninety-three patients were evaluated. INTERVENTIONS: All patients underwent the ligation of intersphincteric tract procedure for anal fistulas. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Failure was defined as nonhealing of the surgical wound or fistula. Recurrence was defined as the reappearance of the fistula after initial healing. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 23 (range, 1-85) weeks, there were 7 failures and 6 recurrences. The median time to healing was 4 (range, 1-12) weeks. The freedom from failure or recurrence at 1 year following the ligation of intersphincteric tract procedure was 78% (95% CI: 66%-90%). All 7 failures had discharge at the intersphincteric wound. Four had an unhealed internal opening, and 3 had isolated failures at the intersphincteric wound. Endoanal ultrasonography revealed a less complicated anatomy that enabled successful treatment with either local application of silver nitrate (n = 3) or fistulotomy (n = 4). All 6 recurrences had a demonstrable tract from the previous internal opening to an external opening with healing of the intersphincteric wound. The median time to recurrence was 22 (range, 15-33) weeks from the ligation of the intersphincteric tract procedure. Fistulotomy, repeat ligation of intersphincteric tract, or anocutaneous advancement flap procedure was successfully performed subsequently. CONCLUSION: In patients with early failures, the medialization of the external opening to the intersphincteric wound simplified subsequent management. All recurrences should be reevaluated and managed accordingly.

A new application of the four-arm standard da Vinci® surgical system: totally robotic-assisted left-sided colon or rectal resection.

BACKGROUND: The key to successful rectal cancer resection is to perform complete total mesorectal excision (TME). Laparoscopic TME can be challenging, especially in the narrow confines of the pelvis. Robotic-assisted surgery can overcome these limitations through superior three-dimensional (3-D) visualization and the increased range of movements provided by the endowrist function. To date, all totally robotic resections of the rectum have been described using da Vinci® S or Si systems. Due to the limitations of the standard system, only hybrid procedures have been described so far. AIM: To evaluate the feasibility and short-term outcomes of performing totally robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal resections using the standard da Vinci® system with a fourth arm extension. METHODS: The standard system was docked from the patient's left hip. Four 8-mm robotic trocars were inserted. Upon completion of phase 1 (pedicle ligation, colonic mobilization, splenic flexure takedown), the two left-sided arms are repositioned to allow phase 2 (pelvic dissection), enabling the entire procedure except for the distal transection and anastomosis to be performed robotically. RESULTS: Twenty-one robotic procedures were performed from August 2008 to September 2009. The mean age of the patients was 61 years (13 males). The procedures performed included seven anterior resections, seven low anterior resections, five ultralow anterior resections, one abdominoperineal resection, and one resection rectopexy. The majority of the cases were performed in patients with colon or rectal cancer. Operative time ranged from 232 to 444 (mean 316) min. Postoperative morbidity occurred in three patients (14.3%) with no mortalities or conversions. Average hospital stay was 6.4 days. Mean lymph node yield for the cases with cancer was 17.8. CONCLUSIONS: The standard da Vinci® system with four arms can be used to perform totally robotic-assisted colorectal procedures for the left colon and rectum with short-term outcomes similar to those of conventional laparoscopic techniques.

Artificial bowel sphincter implantation for faecal incontinence in Asian patients.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the outcomes with the American Medical Systems artificial bowel sphincter (ABS) implantation for the treatment of intractable faecal incontinence in an Asian population. METHODS: Six Asian patients who underwent ABS implantation between March 2004 and December 2007 for the treatment of faecal incontinence were reviewed. RESULTS: The ABS was successfully implanted in six patients [mean age 50 (20-73) years; 4 males]. The most common causes of incontinence were congenital anomaly of the anus (imperforate anus status post a pull-through procedure) and status-post ultralow anterior resection. Two patients required device explantation due to postoperative infection. One eventually required a colostomy. After a mean follow-up of 22 (4-36) months, four patients continued to have a functional artificial bowel sphincter. Faecal incontinence severity scores improved from a mean of 13 (12-14) to 6 (0-9) postactivation. Anal manometry showed an increase in mean resting pressures (19.2 +/- 7.5 mmHg vs. postimplantation with cuff inflated 45.0 +/- 12.0 mmHg). The comparative preoperative and postactivation faecal incontinence quality of life scores showed improvement in all aspects. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with successful ABS implantation benefited from improved outcomes in function and quality of life. Infection was the most common cause of failure in our patients.

Natural history of small, "indeterminate" hepatic lesions in patients with colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The initial staging CT scan for patients with colorectal cancer may reveal small, "indeterminate" hepatic lesions. The significance of these lesions is often unknown at the time of diagnosis. Surveillance of these lesions is often recommended because they may have an impact on the subsequent management of these patients. This study was designed to determine the prevalence and significance of small (<1 cm on CT scan), indeterminate liver lesions detected preoperatively in patients with colorectal cancer and to determine whether further surveillance imaging of these patients is required. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively, from January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2005. All colorectal cancer patients with small, indeterminate liver lesions on their initial staging CT scan were included. These lesions were formally reported as being too small to be characterized. All subsequent surveillance images of the liver were reviewed to assess the natural history of these lesions. RESULTS: Four hundred nineteen patients with colorectal cancer had staging CT performed. Seventy patients (16.7%) had small liver lesions on their initial CT that could not be definitely characterized. Forty-six (65.7%) underwent subsequent imaging of their liver lesions. Forty-one (89.1%) of these were shown to be stable lesions that were likely benign. Only five patients (10.9%) showed progression on subsequent liver imaging, suggestive of early metastases and consistent with their clinical picture. CONCLUSION: Small, indeterminate liver lesions may occur in up to 16.7% of patients with colorectal cancer. Although most of these lesions remain quiescent, surveillance imaging is recommended because a small but not insignificant proportion of patients with such lesions actually harbor early metastases.

Is laparoscopic colectomy as cost beneficial as open colectomy?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic colectomy has yet to gain widespread acceptance in cost-conscious health-care institutions. The aim of the present study was to define the cost-benefit relationship of laparoscopic versus open colectomy. METHODS: Thirty-two consecutive patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colectomy (LC) by a single colorectal surgeon between August 2004 and September 2005 were reviewed. Cases were matched with a historical cohort undergoing elective open colectomy (OC) between June 2003 and July 2004. Demography, perioperative data, histopathology and cost were compared. RESULTS: Both groups had similar demographics. Most resections (90.6%) were for cancer. Operative time was significantly longer for LC compared to OC (180 min vs 110 min, P < 0.001). Four patients (12.5%) in the LC group required conversion. LC patients, however, had lower median pain scores (3, 2 and 1 vs 6, 4 and 2 at 24, 48 and 72 h postoperatively, P < 0.001), faster resolution of ileus (3 vs 4 days, P < 0.001) and earlier discharge (6 vs 9 days, P < 0.001) compared to the OC group. As a result, overall hospital cost for both procedures was not significantly different (US$7943 vs US$7253, P = 0.41). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic colectomy is as cost-beneficial in the short term as open colectomy.

Management of acute bleeding per rectum.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding per rectum is a common indication for acute hospital admissions to the colorectal department. The frequencies of aetiologies in Singapore are different from those in Western populations. A retrospective analysis of the demography, pathology and management of acute bleeding per rectum was performed to determine the outcome and difference in aetiology from the West. METHODS: During the 1-year period from 1 October 1995 to 30 September 1996, 547 patients were admitted to Singapore General Hospital form the emergency department for acute bleeding per rectum. There were 377 males and 170 females; the mean age was 42 years (range, 15-97 years). RESULTS: Of the patients admitted, 87% wer admitted due to perianal conditions diagnosed at bedside proctoscopy, where haemorrhoids mad up 94%. One percent bled from the upper gastrointestinal tract, while 12% bled from colorectal pathology. Massive bleeding form the colorectum was uncommon. Less than one third of the 47 patients required blood transfusions. Colonoscopy was the most useful diagnostic tool for bleeding from the colorectum. The more common colonic pathologies were diverticular disease (33%), adenomas (18%), and malignancy (26%), accounting for the majority of acute patient admissions. Colonic causes of bleeding were less common and were most stable. There were differences in the frequencies of aetiologies in our population compared ot Western populations. Understanding the common pathologies and outcomes guides the management fo our patients.

Comparison of J-pouch and coloplasty pouch for low rectal cancers: a randomized, controlled trial investigating functional results and comparative anastomotic leak rates.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of a novel coloplasty colonic pouch design in optimizing bowel function after ultralow anterior resection. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: A colonic J-pouch may reduce excessive stool frequency and incontinence after anterior resection, but at the risk of evacuation problems. Experimental surgery on pigs has suggested that a coloplasty pouch (CP) may be a useful alternative. Although CP has recently been shown to be feasible in patients, there is no randomized controlled trial comparing bowel function with the J-pouch. METHODS: After anterior resection for cancer, patients were allocated to either J-pouch or CP-anal anastomoses. Continence scoring, anorectal manometry, and endoanal ultrasound assessments were made before surgery. All complications were recorded, and these preoperative assessments were repeated at 4 months. The assessments were repeated again at 1 year, and a quality of life questionnaire was added. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were recruited from October 1998 to April 2000. Both groups were well matched for age, gender, staging, adjuvant therapy, and mean follow-up. There were no differences in the intraoperative time and hospital stay. CP resulted in more anastomotic leaks. At 4 months, J-pouch patients had 10.3% less stool fragmentation but poorer stool deferment and more nocturnal leakage. However, there were no differences in the bowel function, continence score, and quality of life at 1 year. There were no differences in the anorectal manometry and endoanal ultrasound findings. CONCLUSIONS: Coloplasty pouches resulted in more anastomotic leaks and minimal differences in bowel function. At present, the J-pouch remains the benchmark for routine clinical practice, and due care (including defunctioning stoma) should be exercised in situations requiring CP.